Advertisement

Evaluating acousticcommunication performance of micro autonomous underwater vehicles in confined spaces

  • Qiu-yang Tao
  • Yue-hai Zhou
  • Feng Tong
  • Ai-jun Song
  • Fumin Zhang
Article

Abstract

Micro-sized autonomous underwater vehicles (μAUVs) are well suited to various applications in confined underwater spaces. Acoustic communication is required for many application scenarios of μAUVs to enable data transmission without surfacing. This paper presents the integration of a compact acoustic communication device with a μAUV prototype. Packet reception rate (PRR) and bit error rate (BER) of the acoustic communication link are evaluated in a confined pool environment through experiments while the μAUV is either stationary or moving. We pinpoint several major factors that impact the communication performance. Experimental results show that the multi-path effect significantly affects the synchronization signals of the communication device. The relative motion between the vehicle and the base station also degrades the communication performance. These results suggest future methods towards improvements.

Key words

Autonomous underwater vehicles Underwater acoustic communications Confined water space 

CLC number

TB567 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express heartfelt gratitude to Sean MAXON, Chang QIN, and Jaeseok CHA for helping with the experiments and building the μAUV prototype.

References

  1. Akyildiz IF, Pompili D, Melodia T, 2005. Underwater acoustic sensor networks: research challenges. Ad Hoc Netw, 3(3):257–279.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2005.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anguita D, Brizzolara D, Parodi G, et al., 2011. Optical wireless underwater communication for AUV: preliminary simulation and experimental results. OCEANS, p.1–5.  https://doi.org/10.1109/Oceans-Spain.2011.6003598 Google Scholar
  3. Brignone L, Alves J, Opderbecke J, 2009. GREX sea trials: first experiences in multiple underwater vehicle coordination based on acoustic communication. OCEANS, p.1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANSE.2009.5278281 Google Scholar
  4. Brun LC, 2012. ROV/AUV trends: market and technology. Mar Technol Rep, 55(7):48–51.  https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.1.4062.5686 Google Scholar
  5. Che XH, Wells I, Dickers G, et al., 2010. Re-evaluation of RF electromagnetic communication in underwater sensor networks. IEEE Commun Mag, 48(12):143–151.  https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2010.5673085 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chitre M, Shahabudeen S, Freitag L, et al., 2008. Recent advances in underwater acoustic communications & networking. OCEANS, p.1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2008.5289428 Google Scholar
  7. Cho S, Zhang FM, Edwards C, 2016. Tidal variability of acoustic detection. IEEE Int Conf on Big Data and Cloud Computing (BDCloud), Social Computing and Networking (SocialCom), Sustainable Computing and Communications (SustainCom), p.431–436.  https://doi.org/10.1109/BDCloud-SocialCom-SustainCom.2016.70 Google Scholar
  8. Cochenour B, Mullen L, Laux A, et al., 2006. Effects of multiple scattering on the implementation of an underwater wireless optical communications link. OCEANS, p.1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2006.306863 Google Scholar
  9. Edwards DB, Bean TA, Odell DL, et al., 2004. A leader-follower algorithm for multiple AUV formations. IEEE/OES Autonomous Underwater Vehicles, p.40–46.  https://doi.org/10.1109/AUV.2004.1431191 Google Scholar
  10. Freitag L, Grund M, Singh S, et al., 2000. Acoustic communication in very shallow water: results from the 1999 AUV Fest. OCEANS MTS/IEEE Conf and Exhibition, p.2155–2160.  https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2000.882253 Google Scholar
  11. Freitag L, Grund M, Singh S, et al., 2005. The WHOI micromodem: an acoustic communications and navigation system for multiple platforms. OCEANS MTS/IEEE, p.1086–1092.  https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2005.1639901 Google Scholar
  12. Jiang WH, Tong F, Zhou YH, 2016. R&D of an spread spectrum acoustic communication modem with ranging capability. Proc 11th ACM Int Conf on Underwater Networks & Systems, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2999504.3001109 Google Scholar
  13. Johnson M, Freitag L, Stojanovic M, 1997. Improved Doppler tracking and correction for underwater acoustic communications. IEEE Int Conf on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, p.575–578.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.1997.599703 Google Scholar
  14. Kilfoyle DB, Baggeroer AB, 2000. The state of the art in underwater acoustic telemetry. IEEE J Ocean Eng, 25(1):4–27.  https://doi.org/10.1109/48.820733 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Marques ERB, Pinto J, Kragelund S, et al., 2007. AUV control and communication using underwater acoustic networks. OCEANS, p.1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANSE.2007.4302469 Google Scholar
  16. Meyer B, Isokeit C, Maehle E, et al., 2017. Using small swarm-capable AUVs for submesoscale eddy measurements in the Baltic Sea. OCEANS MTS/IEEE, p.1–5.Google Scholar
  17. Mintchev S, Donati E, Marrazza S, et al., 2014. Mechatronic design of a miniature underwater robot for swarm operations. IEEE Int Conf on Robotics and Automation, p.2938–2943.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2014.6907282 Google Scholar
  18. Osterloh C, Pionteck T, Maehle E, 2012. MONSUN II: A small and inexpensive AUV for underwater swarms. ROBOTIK; 7th German Conf on Robotics, p.1–6.Google Scholar
  19. Partan J, Kurose J, Levine BN, 2007. A survey of practical issues in underwater networks. ACM SIGMOBILE Mob Comput Commun Rev, 11(4):23–33.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1347364.1347372 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Renner C, Golkowski AJ, 2016. Acoustic modem for micro AUVs: design and practical evaluation. Proc 11th ACM Int Conf on Underwater Networks & Systems, Article 2.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2999504.3001076 Google Scholar
  21. Schill F, Zimmer UR, Trumpf J, 2004. Visible spectrum optical communication and distance sensing for underwater applications. Australasian Conf on Robotics and Automation, p.1–8.Google Scholar
  22. Sharif BS, Neasham J, Hinton OR, et al., 2000. A computationally efficient Doppler compensation system for underwater acoustic communications. IEEE J Ocean Eng, 25(1):52–61.  https://doi.org/10.1109/48.820736 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stojanovic M, 1995. Underwater acoustic communications. Proc Electro/Int, p.435–440.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ELECTR.1995.471021 Google Scholar
  24. Stojanovic M, Preisig J, 2009. Underwater acoustic communication channels: Propagation models and statistical characterization. IEEE Commun Mag, 47(1):84–89.  https://doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2009.4752682 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wu WC, Song AJ, Varnell JP, et al., 2014. Cooperatively mapping of the underwater acoustic channel by robot swarms. Proc 9th ACM Int Conf on Underwater Networks & Systems, Article 20.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2671490.2674572 Google Scholar
  26. Zhou W, Habetler TG, Harley RG, 2007. Bearing condition monitoring methods for electric machines: a general review. IEEE Int Symp on Diagnostics for Electric Machines, Power Electronics and Drives, p.3–6.  https://doi.org/10.1109/DEMPED.2007.4393062 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Zhejiang University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Electrical and Computer EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.College of Ocean and Earth SciencesXiamen UniversityXiamenChina
  3. 3.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringThe University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA

Personalised recommendations